5.3 Results
5.3.2 Phenotypic and genotypic correlations among soybean genotypes per environment
morphological and physiological traits studied in the field and greenhouse environment respectively are presented in Table 5.3 and 5.4. Under WS in the field environment, PH showed a significant and positive correlation with STD (r=0.77; P≤0.01), LW (r=0.51; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.73; P≤0.01), GY (r=0.26; P≤0.05) and had significant negative correlation with STC (r=-0.31; P≤0.01). The STD, indicated a significant and positive correlation with LW (r=0.56; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.89; P≤0.01) and GY (r=0.27; P≤0.01). The LW, showed a significant and positive correlation with LL (r=0.55; P≤0.01) and GY (r=0.36; P≤0.01). The LL, showed a positive significant correlation with GY (r=0.30; P≤0.01).
103
However, under WW for the field environment, PH showed a significant and positive correlation with STD (r=0.66; P≤0.01), LW (r=0.45; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.65; P≤0.01), SW (r=0.43; P≤0.05). The STD, indicated a significant and positive correlation with LW (r=0.46; P≤0.01), BM (r=0.36; P≤0.01), SW (r=0.58; P≤0.01) and had a significant and negative correlation with LL (r=-0.83; P≤0.91). The LW, showed a significant and positive correlation with LL (r=0.45; P≤0.01). The LW, showed a significant and positive with SMOI (r=0.28; P≤0.01, BM (r=0.49; P≤0.01) and SW (r=0.56; P≤0.01). The CC, showed a positive significant correlation with SMOI (r=0.30; P≤0.01). The SMOI, showed a positive significant correlation with BM (r=0.51; P≤0.01).
Under WS in the greenhouse environment, CC showed a significant and positive correlation with PH (r=0.24; P≤0.05), STD (r=0.33; P≤0.01), LW (r=0.36; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.55; P≤0.01). The FLW, indicated a significant and positive correlation with STC (r=0.56; P≤0.01). The BM, showed a significant and positive correlation with STD (r=0.31; P≤0.01). The SW, showed a positive significant correlation with SMOI (r=0.29; P≤0.01) and BM (r=0.21; P≤0.01). The GY, showed a positive significant correlation with SMOI (r=0.47; P≤0.01) and 37 (r=0.21; P≤0.01). However, under WW for the field environment, PH showed a significant and positive correlation with SW (r=0.; P≤0.01) and had significant negative correlation with FLW (r=-0.25; P≤0.01). The STD, indicated a significant and positive correlation with SW (r=0.35;
P≤0.01). The LW, showed a significant and positive correlation with CC (r=0.40; P≤0.01). The LW, showed a significant and positive with SMOI (r=0.28; P≤0.01, BM (r=0.49; P≤0.01) and SW (r=0.56; P≤0.01). The LL, showed a significant and positive with SW (r=0.35; P≤0.01). The SMOI, showed a positive significant correlation with GY (r=0.34; P≤0.01). The BMI, showed a positive significant correlation with SMOI (r=0.38; P≤0.01).
104
Table 5.3: The phenotypic correlation for soybean lines under well-watered and water-stressed regime in the field environment.
Well-watered
PH STD LW LL
STC FLW CC SMOI BM SW GY
PH 1.00 0.65** 0.45** 0.65** -0.02 -0.01 - 0.12
0.05 0.19 0.43** - 0.00 STD 0.77** 1.00 0.46** -
0.91**
-0.02 -0.01 0.02 0.16 0.36** 0.58** 0.12 Water-
stressed
LW 0.51** 0.56** 1.00 0.45** -0.01 0.14 0.10 0.14 0.02 0.25 0.20 LL 0.73** 0.89** 0.55** 1.00 0.01 -0.04 0.02 0.28* 0.49** 0.56** 0.14 STC -
0.31**
-0.14 -0.17 -0.24 1.00 -0.20 0.04 0.02 -0.02 0.00 - 0.23 FLW 0.14 0.10 0.19 0.05 -0.05 1.00 -
0.08
-0.09 0.11 0.00 0.06 CC -0.18 -0.12 -0.19 -0.30* 0.20 0.30 1.00 0.30** 6e04 0.14 0.18 SMOI 0.06 -0.01 -015 0.01 0.16 0.03 -
0.10
1.00 0.51** 0.11 0.53 BM -0.0 -0.12 0.02 -0.12 -0.08 0.16 0.16 0.39** 1.00 0.41 0.39 SW 0.05 -0.00 0.04 0.08 -0.06 0.09 -
0.14
0.19 0.21 1.00 -
0.03 GY 0.26 * 0.27 * 036 ** 0.30 * -0.16 0.20 -
0.09
0.23 -014 -0.01 1.00 Note: PH-plant height; SD-stem diameter; LW-leaf width; LL-leaf length; SMOI-Moisture content; STC- stomatal conductance; CC-chlorophyll content; SW-100 seed weight; BM-biomass Yield and GY-grain yield; *Significant at P≤0.05, perfect correlation ± 1; High correlation ± 0.50-1; Moderate correlation ± 0.30-0.49; Low correlation ±0.29; ***Significant at P≤0.001, ** significant at P≤0.01, *Significant at P≤0.05.
Under WS in the field environment, the genotypic correlation for STD showed a significant and positive correlation with PH (r=0.90; P≤0.01. The STD, indicated a significant and positive correlation with LW (r=0.56; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.89; P≤0.01) and GY (r=0.27; P≤0.01). The LL, showed a significant and positive correlation with PH (r=0.91; P≤0.01) and STD (r=0.36; P≤0.01). The STC, showed a negative and significant correlation with PH (r=-0.89; P≤0.01) and LL (r=-0.53; P≤0.01). The FLW, showed a significant and negative correlation with LW (r=-0.97; P≤0.01). The CC, showed a significant and negative correlation with LW (r=-0.97; P≤0.01). The SMOI, showed a positive significant correlation with PH (r=0.40; P≤0.01) and LW (r=0.40; P≤0.01) and a significant and negative correlation with STC (r=-0.59; P≤0.01). The BM, showed a significant and negative correlation with STC (r=-0.74; P≤0.01).
105
Table 5.4: The phenotypic correlation for soybean lines under the well-watered and water-stressed regimes in the greenhouse.
Well- Watered
PH STD LW LL
STC CC FLW SMOI BM SW GY
PH 1.00 0.19 0.13 0.12 0.10 -0.12 -0.25** 0.03 -0.14 0.03** -0.15
STD -0.04 1.00 0.36** 0.31** 0.05 0.09 0.20 -0.22 -0.03 0.35** 0.03
Water stressed
LW 0.10 0.54 1.00 0.83** -0.20 0.40** -9e04 -0.16 0.06 0.20 0.04
LL 0.03 -0.04 0.03 1.00 -0.13 0.35** -0.06 0.18 0.02 0.22 -0.06
STC 0.16 0.01 -0.04 -0.08 1.00 -0.09 0.09 0.02 0.16 0.15 0.03
CC 0.24* 0.33** 0.36** -0.04 0.14 1.00 0.06 -0.012 0.23 -0.03 -0.03
FLW -0.16 0.09 0.13 -0.01 0.31** 0.06 1.00 -0.13 0.21 0.02 0 23
SMOI 0.19 0.05 -0.18 0.20 0.00 -0.15 -0.13 1.00 0.21 0.04 0 24*
BM 0.05 0.31** -0.12 -0.08 -0.02 0.09 -0.01 0.12 1.00 -0.20 0 38**
SW 0.02 0.05 -0.21 0.14 0.15 0.12 -0.19 0.29** 0.21* 1.00 -0.17
GY -0.02 0.12 0.08 -0.11 -7e-04 -0.08 0.10 0.47** 0.37** 0.04 1.00
Note: PH-plant height; SD-stem diameter; LW-leaf width; LL-leaf length; SMOI-Moisture content; STC- stomatal conductance; CC-chlorophyll content; SW-100 seed weight; BM-biomass Yield and GY-grain yield; *Significant at P≤0.05, perfect correlation ± 1; High correlation ± 0.50-1; Moderate correlation ± 0.30-0.49; Low correlation ±0.29; ***Significant at P≤0.001, ** significant at P≤0.01, *Significant at P≤0.05.
The BM, showed a significant and negative correlation with STC (r=-0.74; P≤0.01). The SW, showed a positive significant correlation with PH (r=0.93; P≤0.01), LW (r=0.70; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.45; P≤0.01) and had a negative correlation with STC (r=-0.75; P≤0.01). The GY, showed a positive significant correlation with PH (r=0.47; P≤0.01), LW (r=0.36; P≤0.01) and had a negative correlation with STC (r=-0.27; P≤0.01).
However, under WW for the field environment, PH showed a significant and positive correlation with STD (r=0.77; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.68; P≤0.01), SW (r=0.81; P≤0.05). The STD, indicated a significant and positive correlation with LL (r=0.98; P≤0.01), STC (r=0.91; P≤0.01), SW (r=0.81; P≤0.01). The STC, showed a
106
negative and significant correlation with PH (r=-0.89; P≤0.01) and LL (r=-0.53; P≤0.01). The LW, showed a significant and negative correlation with FLW (r=-1.15; P≤0.01), SMOI (r=-1.15; P≤0.01), CC (r=-0.82;
P≤0.01) and GY (r=-0.67; P≤0.01). The LL, showed a significant and positive correlation with SW (r=0.62;
P≤0.01). The FLW showed a significant and positive with CC (r=0.07; P≤0.01) and a negative correlation with SMOI (r=-0.1.41; P≤0.01) and GY (r=-0.72; P≤0.01). The CC, showed a negative correlation with SMOI (r=-0.88; P≤0.01) and GY (r=-0.54; P≤0.01). The SMOI, showed a significant negative correlation with GY (r=-0.51; P≤0.01).
Under WS in the greenhouse environment, STD showed a significant negative correlation with PH (r=- 0.85; P≤0.01). The LL showed a negative correlation with PH (r=-0.45; P≤0.01). The CC showed a significant and a negative correlation with PH (r=-0.38; P≤0.01) and STD (r=-0.03; P≤0.01) and LL (r=- 0.03; P≤0.01). The FLW showed a significant negative correlation with LL (r=-0.61 P≤0.01) and GY (r=- 0.38; P≤0.01). The SMOI showed a significant and positive with STC (r=0.38; P≤0.01) and a negative correlation with LL (r=-0.72; P≤0.01). The BM showed a significant positive with LL (r=0.51; P≤0.01).
The SW showed a significant positive with LL (r=0.70; P≤0.01). The GY showed a significant positive with STC (r=0.38; P≤0.01) and a negative correlation with LL (r=-0.72; P≤0.01).
Table 5.5: The genotypic correlations among studied morphological and physiological soybean genotype under water-stressed condition (lower diagonal) and water-stressed water regime (upper diagonal) in the field environment.
WS
PH STD LW LL
STC FLW CC SMOI BM SW GY
PH 1.00 0.77** NA 0.68** 0.089 NA NA NA 0.13 0.81** NA
STD 0 90** 1.00 NA 0.98** 0.91** NA NA NA 0.29 0.63** NA
WW LW NA NA 1.00 NA NA -1.15** -3.82** -5.46** NA NA -6.67**
LL 0 91** 1.12** NA 1.00 0.43 NA NA NA -0.07 0.618** NA
STC -0.89** -0.53** NA -0.31 1.00 NA NA NA -0.07 0.27 NA
FLW NA NA -1.97** NA NA 1.00 4.07** -1.41** NA NA -0.72**
CC NA NA -5.62** NA NA 6.38 1.00 -0.88** NA NA -0.54**
SMOI 0.40** 0.40** NA 0.09 -0.59** NA NA 1.00 NA NA -0.16**
BM 0.05 -0.28 NA -0.22 -0.74** NA NA 0.70 1.00 0.23 NA
SW 0 93** 0.70** NA 0.45** -0.75** NA NA 0.03 0.80 1.00 NA
GY 0.47** 0.36* NA -0.05 -0.27** NA NA 0.14 -0.11 0.07 1.00
Note: PH-plant height; SD-stem diameter; LW-leaf width; LL-leaf length; SMOI-Moisture content; STC- stomatal conductance; CC-chlorophyll content; SW-100 seed weight; BM-biomass Yield and GY-grain yield; Perfect correlation ± 1; Strong correlation ± 0.80; Moderate correlation ± 0.50; weak correlation
107
±0.20; No correlation ±0.0; *Significant at P≤0.05***Significant at P≤0.001, ** significant at P≤0.01,
*Significant at P≤0.05.
Under WW in the greenhouse environment, PH showed a significant and positive genotypic correlation with STD (r=0.54; P≤0.01), LW (r=0.22; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.42; P≤0.01), STC (r=0.14; P≤0.01), CC (r=0.62;
P≤0.0), FLW (r=0.65; P≤0.01), SW (r=0.40; P≤0.01) and GY (r=0.26; P≤0.50). The STD, indicated a significant and positive correlation with, LW (r=0.89; P≤0.01), LL (r=0.48; P≤0.01), STC (r=0.63; P≤0.01), CC (r=0.09; P≤0.0), FLW (r=0.98; P≤0.01), SW (r=0.24; P≤0.01). The LW, showed a significant and positive correlation with LL (r=0.48; P≤0.01), STC (r=0.61; P≤0.01), CC (r=0.18; P≤0.0), FLW (r=0.98;
P≤0.01), SW (r=0.24; P≤0.01) and had a significant negative correlation with GY (r=-0.58; P≤0.50). The LL, showed a positive significant correlation with, STC (r=0.30; P≤0.01), CC (r=0.31; P≤0.0), FLW (r=0.51; P≤0.01) and SW (r=0.14; P≤0.01). The STC showed a significant and positive correlation with CC (r=0.47; P≤0.0), FLW (r=0.98; P≤0.01), SW (r=0.67; P≤0.01) and GY (r=0.34; P≤0.50). The CC, indicated a significant and positive correlation with FLW (r=0.55; P≤0.01), SW (r=0.63; P≤0.01) and GY (r=0.56;
P≤0.50). The BM, showed a significant and positive correlation with SW (r=0.57; P≤0.01) and GY (r=0.58;
P≤0.01).
Table 5.6: The genotypic correlations among studied morphological and physiological soybean genotype under water-stressed condition (lower diagonal) and water-stressed water regime (upper diagonal) in the greenhouse environment.
Well- Watered
PH STD LW LL
STC CC FLW SMOI BM SW GY
PH 1.00 0.54** 0 22** 0.86** 0.14** 0.62** 0.65** NA NA 0.40** 0.50**
STD -0.85** 1.00 0.89** 0.61** 0.63** 0.09** 0.98** NA NA 0.24** 0.11
LW -0.45** -0.24 1.00 0.36** 0.61** 0.18** 0.86** NA NA 0.94** -0.58**
LL NA NA NA 1.00 0.30** 0.31** 0.51** NA NA 0.67** 0.34*
Water- stressed
STC NA NA NA -7.76* 1.00 0.47** 0.98** NA NA 0.14** -0.11
CC -0.38** -0.03** -0.08** NA NA NA 0.05** NA NA 0.63** 0.56**
FLW NA NA NA -0.61** -0.38** NA 1.00 NA NA NA NA
SMOI NA NA NA -0.72** 2.38** NA 0.02** 1.00 NA NA NA
BM NA NA NA 0.51** 0.13 NA -0.06 0.14 1.00 0.57** 0.58**
SW NA NA NA 0.70** 0.06 NA -0.36** -0.58** 0.33* 1.00 -0.12
GY NA NA NA -0.27** 0.95** NA -0.49** 2.20** 0.71** -0.09 1.00
Note: PH-plant height; SD-stem diameter; LW-leaf width; LL-leaf length; SMOI-Moisture content; STC- stomatal conductance; CC-chlorophyll content; SW-100 seed weight; BM-biomass Yield and GY-grain yield; Perfect correlation ± 1; Strong correlation ± 0.80; Moderate correlation ± 0.50; weak correlation
±0.20; No correlation ±0.0*Significant at P≤0.05***Significant at P≤0.001, ** significant at P≤0.01,
*Significant at P≤0.05
108